It's that time of the year for me.

[Woodie]

2 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Honestly, this is the case for virtually every TE coming out of college football these days. For the most part, they're basically being used as jumbo slot WRs. Most of them spend a ton of time split out and a lot less time on the line.

For the most part, I agree with you.  But there are a handful of "blocking" TE's, but their limitations tend to be on the receiving end.  So true complete TE's are very rare these days.  The question is how much can they be coached up on their deficiencies?  That's the part the real evaluators should be figuring out and we fans aren't really privy to.    

[Woodie]

28 minutes ago, stbugs said:

I like Ian Thomas and Dissly later as they have been mentioned as decent blockers and they looked pretty smooth in drills. I like Hurst (and Andrews) better than Gisecki based on the receiving drills as well, but hell to the no in the first. 

 Thomas may be my favorite tight end from this draft. It might take a year or two for him to get there, but I think when all said and done he’s going to be the best of the bunch.

And I totally agree about Gisecki. I just don’t have a good feeling about him. 

[Growl]

6 hours ago, stbugs said:

OK Mr. Intellectual. I understand your point about Norwell, but let me tell you where that point was wrong while also telling you that you still made another point at the end that using a late 1st on a Guard was stupid. People on here said we couldn’t pay Norwell because we already paid Turner and we had to pay Williams soon. For as smart as you think you are, we can’t have 4 OL making 10M+ in 2019, can we? You tried to turn that into we can’t take keep the 1st round Guard pst 5 years ignoring the fact that at that time Williams may be the only high price OL left making it very doable if Daniels or Hernandez or Ragnow become that good.

People don’t like Hurst because he’ll be 30 in the first year of an extension and the fact that his ceiling isn’t anywhere close to the 3 interior OL I just mentioned. There you go. Maybe you should do some thinking before you act like I am regurgitating something I read. I have my philosophy on drafts and that is to draft the strengths of a draft and look at FA where drafts or weak or patch a position of that position is stronger next year (like making sure Peppers resigns as 2019 4-3 DEs look far better than 2018). Adios. 

lol what do current or future contracts have to do with this?

You're talking about a 5 year contract regardless of any hypothetical financial state because under no circumstance do you value a OG at that level.

[LinvilleGorge]

5 hours ago, Woodie said:

 Thomas may be my favorite tight end from this draft. It might take a year or two for him to get there, but I think when all said and done he’s going to be the best of the bunch.

And I totally agree about Gisecki. I just don’t have a good feeling about him. 

Yep.

I think there's a decent chance that three years down the line that Ian Thomas is the best TE out of this draft class.

I also think Mark Andrews is being ridiculously overlooked. Yeah, he's basically just an oversized slot WR right now, but that's true for most TEs coming out of college football right now. But the guy can flat out play.

[AU-panther]

8 hours ago, stbugs said:

Lol. There are plenty of good to great interior OL selected in the mid to late first. Zack Martin, Travis Frederick, Ryan Kelley, Mike Pouncey, David DeCastro, etc.

Late first is when the top G/C usually comes off the board, but obviously you didn’t know that. Also, I’m assuming that you have no idea that C/G is one of if not the best position in this draft. TE is not close. Last year, TE was a top position. So, you’d rather us take the top TE at age 25 in a poor TE pool in the first rather than the 2nd best (Nelson may go top 5) G or 1st C (who could play guard as well) in a strong class that are 2-4 years younger? Wow, that’s smart.

I’m glad you appreciate having a plus Ed Dickson as your first rounder rather than having Ryan Kalil part deux who’ll be 21 or 22.

The strength of the position class is a bit misunderstood around here. Teams think in terms of grade, not rank.

Year 1 - 4 tight ends in the first, grades of 92,91,89,88 would be considered a strong group

Year 2 - 1 tight end in the first, grade of 88, would be considered a weak class.

If the 4th TE in year one goes at 30 and the first TE in year two goes at 30, you are getting the same quality of player.  The quality of the class has no bearing on your pick.

Also how he compares to TEs last year is irrelevant.  The only question is where he ranks in this years draft class, and not with just the TEs but everyone.  Is he a top 25 player, top 35 , or even later?

Personally I think he will go at the back end of the first.  For those of you that don't think has a grade indicative of the end of the end of the first round are you basing that on personal opinion or are you seeing that somewhere?  For the most part I see him listed in that 25-35 range.

 

8 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Truth. I just think Ridley is a better prospect at a higher value position.

His age is a factor that could help to make him available at #24. Like Hurst's age is a factor that could help make him available to us in the 2nd.

I would agree with that.  Ridley is my "hoping he falls pick".

I'm afraid a lot of the Huddle is falling into the same trap they did last year.  We tend to argue about which player to pick among players that probably won't be there. 

Last year is was CMC, Adams, Fornette, or Thomas when in reality the discussion should have been CMC, Barnett, Hooker or Howard.

This year it is Hurst, Ridley, Jackson, Moore when in reality there is a good chance it will be Hurst, Reid, Daniels, or Wynn to name a few.

[Saca312]

11 hours ago, AU-panther said:

Ridley isn't that much younger than Funchess or Amari Cooper. (6-7 months).  1yr and 4months younger than Hurst.

I completely agree. That's why i'm not as enthused with Ridley either. His market share isn't that great.

However, Ridley also is clearly talented. I wouldn't be that upset compared to Hurst because he can contribute day 1. Idek if Hurst can compete by the end of his rookie contract.

[Woodie]

3 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Yep.

I think there's a decent chance that three years down the line that Ian Thomas is the best TE out of this draft class.

I also think Mark Andrews is being ridiculously overlooked. Yeah, he's basically just an oversized slot WR right now, but that's true for most TEs coming out of college football right now. But the guy can flat out play.

Agree that Andrews is being overlooked.  We are actually in a great position for TE.  Since we have Olsen for at least this season, we have the luxury of taking a guy that while needing some work, has the basic talent to be great.  We don't need a starter right out of the gate, just a backup that can contribute as he develops.  It's why I really don't want a 1st round TE.

 

[The Lobo]

5 hours ago, Saca312 said:

I completely agree. That's why i'm not as enthused with Ridley either. His market share isn't that great.

However, Ridley also is clearly talented. I wouldn't be that upset compared to Hurst because he can contribute day 1. Idek if Hurst can compete by the end of his rookie contract.

Which WR would you prefer we draft? 

[Verge]

Frank Ragnow is a surprise lock for a top 25 pick. 

[BigSyke]

For guys that can block and catch but dont have the "sexy 4.5" speed. Chris Herndon(Miami) , Tyler Conklin(Central Michigan) and Troy Fumagalli(Wisconsin) in the later rounds would be great.

Also, someone mentioned Ian Thomas. I like him just as good as Mark Andrews. Just didn't have the opportunity/QB and actually blocks better at this stage. Andrews  seems like he is quicker off the line maybe. I would take either from 3rd to 5th round.

 

[BigSyke]

22 hours ago, Verge said:

Cowboys love Leighton Vander Esch

Titans love Rashaan Evan's

Packers are desperate for corner and will take with their first, or trade up for Ward/Minkah

 

Derwin James will stay in Florida

Daron Payne is a favorite in Washington

Edmund's will go 8 or 9

 

 

Seems like one the top 4 elite corners will fall Panthers. Maybe even one the top guards and even Ridley too. Question is could the Panthers trade down later in the 1st round and still get one of those.

[BigSyke]

On ‎4‎/‎23‎/‎2018 at 3:15 AM, Verge said:

Why hold such reservations about Hurst? Dude is a tool box tight end, he does everything well, he is used as an h back, tight end, slot receiver, tackle, etc. Greg Olsen is an injury prone 33 year old that has threatened the team with retirement. Taking the best tight end in the draft by a fairly large margin makes a ton of sense, it's not like he wouldn't see the field, he would see a ton of snaps. 

 

Hurst can not block at all. If doing a shoulder rush is considered good text book blocking then maybe. LOL

2nd round to 3rd rounder imo.

[AU-panther]

8 hours ago, stbugs said:

Your scenario is the ideal scenario where the two 88 grades go in the exact same spot. That's not reality. Reality is that teams don't just go pure BPA so in Year 1, the 4th TE goes mid 2nd and in Year 2, the 1st TE goes 24th. Just look at the reality that happened in 2017 compared to Hurst being mocked to us at #24. How he compares to last year's TEs is relevant because it shows that your scenario isn't reality and why the strengths of a draft class do matter. TEs rarely go top 10, they start getting picked later in the 1st or sometimes early 2nd. Hurst's grade puts him in the mid 2nd round grading area and yet he may go way higher because the TE class isn't as deep so a team wanting a TE will be reaching, not getting good value. Look at the NFL.com grades:

Hurst: 5.90 mocked to us at #24

2017, deep TE class:

Howard: 6.51 drafted #19

Njoku: 6.41 drafted #29

Engram: 5.97 drafted #23 (closest to showing Hurst could go 24th, but based on his rookie year, looks like Engram may have been graded too low)

Everett: 5.91 drafted #44

Hunter Henry was graded well above Hurst as well (6.2) but he went early 2nd. Hurst at #24 is picking him way above his grade. Calvin Ridley has a 6.4 grade from nfl.com.

 

Teams aren't required to draft a set amount of positions each round.  Strength of a class is relative to the point in the draft you are selecting.  Often when people talk about strong classes they are referring to the top of the class.  Its possible for a class to be weak at the top but stronger in round 2-3.  Will the extra good players at the top of the strong class move some players down? to a degree but not to the degree people think around here.  This is why some years you might have 3 WRs in first round and other years 7 WRs.  This year's WR class is viewed by many as being weak but a lot of that is because of the lack of first round talent.  2nd and 3rd is probably comparable to last year though.

Here again you have to think in term of grade as opposed to rank among position class.  Now rank overall is important though.  You keep comparing Hurst to last years top TEs but that is irrelevant this year.  The only question is where does the rank among the entire draft class this year?

Are there 25 players graded above him? 35? 45?  Does positional value effect this? of course.  You are correct that teams aren't pure BPA, some classes are devalued some, normally RBs, TEs,Safetys, and Guards.  How much is up to the team.

 

[Growl]

11 hours ago, stbugs said:

It's hard to argue when you are going around in circles. You argued that Hurst is a better pick because we will never pay a guard their second contract and used Norwell as the example. We just paid Trai Tuner $11M per year and that's why we didn't resign Norwell. The argument against Hurst is that we won't want to extend him because he'll be 30 his first year out of the rookie/5th year option. Completely different argument since we couldn't afford Norwell because we already have 2 $10M OL and a top 10 salary at C and even with Ryan Kalil retiring, Daryl Williams will hopefully get a big deal in 2019.

Also, since you know exactly what guards are worth, let's do some trivia. Interestingly enough, guards are valued at almost the level of tackles now. There are 13 tackles making $10M+ per year and 8 guards. Maybe the influx of Short, Cox, Donald, etc. has made Guard more of a premium position and the fact that Turner and Norwell both are valued that highly means again, you are work that guards aren't valued at that level. The top guards are in fact valued highly.

I'd love to keep discussing, but I think my efforts would be in vain.

you're right, it would be, because you're still missing the point. This isnt about whatever moronic teams like the jaguars are doing. This isn't about Daryl Williams or ryan Kalil or literally anybody on the team right now. Because even if those are guys aren't on the team-somebody will be. And now, in an effort to explain away the obvious contradiction, you've now rationalized the panthers giving an OG a 70 to 75 million dollar contract. 

To put it simply, I don't care what the jaguars do. The 4 starting OGs in last year's Super Bowl-you know, the reigning conference champions- are making a ***combined grand total sum*** of less than $60 million dollars.

That is total contract worth between four players, and you just advocated for giving out a substantially higher contract to a single player at position of little relative value, all in an attempt to justify your stance inside the standing pretense-that the same people abhorred by getting a 10 year stint out of a TE gleefully cheer drafting a OG who ***shouldnt*** be here more than 5. 

 The reasons for this seem obvious, whether its the age old obsession among fans for drafting the SPA (so called "safest" player available ) or merely a superficial analysis of things like age, 40 time, h'w", etc etc that form a superficial opinion of a more intricate question, the hardened truth still stands that if a 1st round OG ends up having a longer career here than the TE, the panthers have made two mistakes instead of one.